An analysis of the philosophy of law can be done for different reasons. Apart from a purely intellectual interest in understanding this complex phenomenon known as law, scholars also study the same as a normative social practice that purports to guide human behaviour, giving rise to reasons for action. The primary challenge of the branch of scholarship known as jurisprudence is based on this ‘normative, reason-giving aspect of law’. At the same time, we must understand that law is not the only normative realm in any given society. It is one of the many normative standards such as morality, religion, customs and usages, etiquette, self-regulatory standards within a family or corporation etc. So, it is also essential that we study law on the differences and similarities of the same with these normative standards.
While discerning these connections and contradictions, legal theories often study the content of the norm apart from giving importance to the source. Generally, theoretical studies on the content such as natural lawyers emphasize values such as fairness, justice, liberty etc., as qualifications for the norms to be called laws. They have argued that laws must be in tune with certain principles of inner morality, such as that laws be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable are indispensable to law-making. Whereas theories that give prominence to the sources of the norm, such as enactment/command by political institution/authority, do not always emphasize on the content.
Such philosophical analysis of law comprises both explanatory and justificatory aspects. While the explanatory aspect consists of explaining how laws can give rise to reasons and what kinds of reasons are involved. One example of this would be Dworkin’s classification of law as concepts, principles and rules. The aspect of justification concerns whether people ought to comply with the law’s demands. In other words, it is the attempt to explain the moral legitimacy of law and the subjects’ reasons for complying with it.
Validity of law resides in the political sovereignty of the maker of that law refers to:
- Legal Positivism
- Natural Law
- Historical School
- Sociological School
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
- Legal Positivism: This legal theory holds that laws are rules created by human authorities and their legitimacy is derived from the institutions that create them. According to legal positivism, the validity of a law is determined by its source, not its content. Laws are valid if they are enacted by an authority with political sovereignty, reflecting an emphasis on the formal enactment by a recognized authority.
- Natural Law: This theory suggests that laws are valid if they align with moral principles or universal ethical standards. It emphasizes the content of laws being inherently just or fair, rather than focusing solely on the origin.
- Historical School: This school of thought asserts that law is an expression of the spirit of a people and evolves with society over time. It focuses on cultural traditions and historical context.
- Sociological School: This perspective sees law as a social institution which must be understood in terms of its social function and impact. It emphasizes how laws arise from social needs and values.
A norm cannot become legally valid unless its content is fair and just in accordance to:
- Legal Positivism
- Natural Law
- Historical School
- Sociological School
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
“The falsehood of legal positivism resides in envisaging that the law consists of only rules. However, this is a serious mistake since legal principles partly determine the law in addition to rules. The distinction between rules and principles is a logical one. Rules apply in an ‘all or nothing fashion.’ If the rule applies to the circumstances, it determines a particular legal outcome. If it does not apply, it is simply irrelevant to the outcome…..” according to:
- ronald dworkin, taking rights Seriously,1977
- John Finnis, Natural Law and Natural rights, 1980.
- H.L.A.Hart, the Concept of Law, 1961.
- raz, Joseph, Legal Principles and the Limits of Law, 1972.
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The provided question revolves around a quote about the nature of legal principles and rules, attributed to a specific author. To determine the correct answer, it is essential to consider the contributors to legal philosophy who have discussed such distinctions.
Among the given options, "ronald dworkin, taking rights Seriously,1977" aligns with the quoted content. Dworkin, a renowned legal philosopher, criticized legal positivism and emphasized the significance of principles alongside rules in law. His work, "Taking Rights Seriously," discusses the notion that law is not merely a system of rules but also includes principles that guide judicial decisions. This contrasts with legal positivists like H.L.A. Hart who focused on the systematic nature of law based on rules.
Therefore, the most accurate attribution of the provided quote is to Ronald Dworkin in his book "Taking Rights Seriously, 1977."
| Option | Author | Work | Publication Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ronald Dworkin | Taking Rights Seriously | 1977 |
| 2 | John Finnis | Natural Law and Natural Rights | 1980 |
| 3 | H.L.A. Hart | The Concept of Law | 1961 |
| 4 | Joseph Raz | Legal Principles and the Limits of Law | 1972 |
In summary, the statement in question is most likely from Ronald Dworkin's exploration of law, where he argues for a broader understanding that encompasses both rules and principles.
Principles requiring that laws be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable are indispensable to law-making correspond to:
- inner morality
- method of logic
- Legitimacy and transparency in law making
- democratic law making
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The principles requiring laws to be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable fall under the concept of "inner morality". This concept is discussed in the philosophy of law and was extensively explored by legal theorists like Lon L. Fuller. According to Fuller's analysis, a system of rules cannot be considered a legal system unless it exhibits these qualities. The characteristics of inner morality are integral to ensuring that laws effectively guide and regulate human behavior. This makes them indispensable to the process of law-making, as they establish the necessary moral framework for the functioning of laws.
The concept of inner morality is distinct from other approaches to law which might focus on the source of legal norms, such as commands from an authority, rather than on the content or moral principles the law should embody. Legal scholars emphasize that for laws to truly serve their purpose, they must adhere to these moral principles, ensuring fairness, coherence, and reasonableness.
In this context, inner morality supports the idea that laws should:
- Be general: Applicable to everyone without discrimination or favoritism.
- Be public: Known or accessible to all, ensuring transparency.
- Be prospective: Focus on regulating future actions rather than past ones.
- Be coherent: Free of contradictions and logically structured.
- Be clear: Easily understandable for those subject to the laws.
- Be stable: Not subject to frequent, arbitrary changes.
- Be practicable: Possible to comply with and enforce effectively.
These principles are essential in distinguishing a legal framework from arbitrary commands and ensure that the law remains a normative guide for society.
‘i mean simply that history, in illuminating the past, illuminates the present, and in illuminating the present, illuminates the future’ opined by:
- roscoe Pound
- Benjamin Cardozo
- Duguit
- Auguste Comte
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
In legal studies, understanding the philosophy and nature of law involves analyzing it as a distinctive social-political phenomenon with universal characteristics. Jurisprudence, the branch dealing with the normative aspects of law, questions the ‘What is Law?’ concept. Law shares space with other normative standards such as morality, religion, and custom. Legal theories examine both sources and content of norms, prioritizing different aspects.
While natural law theories prioritize values like fairness and justice as qualifications for laws, other theories focus more on sources like political authorities. Philosophical analysis of law includes both explanatory and justificatory aspects, such as Dworkin’s classifications and the moral legitimacy of legal demands.
the life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience’ is stated by:
the life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience’ is stated by:
- Holmes
- Dworkin
- Cardozo
- Amartya Sen
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The statement, "the life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience," is attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., an influential American jurist and Supreme Court Justice. Holmes emphasized the role of human experience in shaping the law, as opposed to deriving law purely from logical deductions or abstract principles.
In legal studies, this perspective highlights the idea that law evolves through practical applications and societal changes rather than solely through theoretical constructs. While logical reasoning is undoubtedly essential in legal processes, Holmes points out that the development and application of laws are deeply rooted in the context of human experience and societal needs.
This viewpoint is reflective of Holmes' broader philosophy on jurisprudence, where he often emphasized pragmatism and realism in understanding and applying law.
Correct Answer: Holmes
Top Questions on Jurisprudence
- ‘Ex-debito justitiae’ means
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- Within legal positivism, substantial effort has been devoted for analysing fundamental legal concepts and such analysis serves the basis for
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- A captain’s throwing cargo overboard to stop his ship going down: he might well claim, in mitigation, that he had no choice. The excusing condition argued reflecting the source of action as
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- Which of the following is the basis for social contract?
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- The process of legal analysis requires
- AILET LLM - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
The document presents a critique of the United Nations (UN) organization, arguing that it has failed to carry out its charter-mandated tasks, specifically to ”maintain international peace and security” and ”to achieve international cooperation” in solving global problems. The author notes growing public frustration with catastrophic humanitarian situations and the failure of peace-keeping operations, leading to widespread scepticism about the possibility of ”revitalization”.
UN Reform Approaches
Discussions on UN reform are divided into two main categories: the conservative approach and the radical approach.
1. Conservative Approach:
The conservative view considers the existing Charter ”practically untouchable” and believes in improving ”collective security” as defined in Chapter VII. Key positions include:
- US Position: Prioritizes its own interests, supports better management and the creation of an Inspector General, favours enlarging the Security Council (to include Germany and Japan, mainly for financing peace-keeping), and associates the UN with regional organizations like NATO for peace enforcement. The US remains reluctant to allow full application of Chapter VII and views collective security restrictively.
- Secretary-General’s Position (Boutros Ghali): Advocated for the full implementation of ’collective security’ as envisaged in 1945, including the use of the Military Staff Committee (Article 47) and the conclusion of special agreements (Article 43) for providing armed forces. He also proposed ’peace enforcement units’ under the command of the Secretary-General and wider use of ’preventive diplomacy’. The report candidly recognized the Security Council’s incapacity to deal with threats from a major power.
2. Radical Approach:
The radical approach criticizes the principles of the present system and proposes an overhaul. It reflects increasing doubts about the value of the Charter’s collective security system, especially in intra-State conflicts. Radical proposals include:
- Establishing an Economic Security Council.
- Modifying the Charter with less reluctance.
- Reforming the IMF and World Bank.
- Developing a new global security system .
- The creation of a consultative parliamentary assembly at the world level.
Future Outlook:
The author asserts that no major or minor reform has any chance of being implemented now, primarily because the Charter’s amendment procedures (requiring a two-thirds majority including all five permanent Security Council members) preclude agreement. However, he concludes that the continuing deterioration of the global situation, driven by economic integration, rising inequality, and intra-State conflicts, will inevitably lead the political establishment to define a new global institutional structure. This future debate will become highly political.
- CLAT PG - 2026
- International Law
“Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act says that when a party to a contract promises to do a certain thing within a specified time but fails to do so, the contract or so much of it as has not been performed, becomes voidable at the option of the promisee if the intention of the parties was, that time should be of the essence of the contract. If time is not the essence of the contract, the contract does not become voidable by the failure to do such thing on or before the specified time but the promisee is entitled to compensation from the promisor for any loss occasioned to him by such failure. Further, if in case of a contract voidable on account of the promisor’s failure to perform his promise within the time agreed and the promisee accepts performance of such promise at any time other than that agreed, the promisee cannot claim compensation for any loss occasioned by the non-performance of the promise at the time agreed, unless, at the time of such acceptance he gives notice to the promisor of his intention to do so.
Sections 73 and 74 deal with consequences of breach of contract. Heading of Sec tion 73 is compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract. When a contract is broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive from the party who has broken the contract compensation for any loss or damage caused to him thereby which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach or which the parties knew when they made the contract to be likely to result from the breach of it. On the other hand, Section 74 deals with compen sation for breach of contract where penalty is stipulated for. When a contract is broken, if a sum is mentioned in the contract as the amount to be paid in case of such breach or if the contract contains any other stipulation by way of penalty, the party complaining of the breach is entitled whether or not actually damage or loss is proved to have been caused thereby, to receive from the party who has broken the contract reasonable compensation not exceeding the amount so named or the penalty stipulated for.”
tracted from: Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited v Software Technol ogy Parks of India 2025 INSC 574- CLAT PG - 2026
- Contract Law
“Law treats all contracts with equal respect and unless a contract is proved to suffer from any of the vitiating factors, the terms and conditions have to be enforced regardless of the relative strengths and weakness of the parties.
Section 28 of the Contract Act does not bar exclusive jurisdiction clauses. What has been barred is the absolute restriction of any party from approaching a legal forum. The right to legal adjudication cannot be taken away from any party through contract but can be relegated to a set of Courts for the ease of the parties. In the present dispute, the clause does not take away the right of the employee to pursue a legal claim but only restricts the employee to pursue those claims before the courts in Mumbai alone.
... the Court must already have jurisdiction to entertain such a legal claim. This limb pertains to the fact that a contract cannot confer jurisdiction on a court that did not have such a jurisdiction in the first place.”
Extracted from: Rakesh Kumar Verma v HDFC Bank Ltd 2025 INSC 473- CLAT PG - 2026
- Contract Law
- “The law is well settled that a constitutional court can award monetary compen sation against the State and its officials for its failure to safeguard fundamental rights of citizens but there is no system or method to measure the damages caused in such situations. Quite often the courts have a difficult task in determining dam ages in various fact situations. The yardsticks normally adopted for determining the compensation payable in private tort claims are not as such applicable when a constitutional court determines the compensation in cases where there is a viola tion of fundamental rights guaranteed to its citizens.
... In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. [(1997) SCC 1 416], a Constitution Bench of this Court held that there is no straitjacket formula for computation of damages and we find that there is no uniformity or yardstick followed in awarding damages for violation of fundamental rights. In Rudul Sah case [Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, (1983) 4 SCC 141] this Court used the terminology ’palliative’ for measuring the damages and the formula of ’adhoc’ was applied. In Sebastian Hongray case [Se bastian M. Hongray v. Union of India, (1984) 3 SCC 82] the expression used by this Court for determining the monetary compensation was ’exemplary’ costs and the formula adopted was ’punitive’. In Bhim Singh case [Bhim Singh v. State of J & K, (1985) 4 SCC 677], the expression used by the Court was ’compensation’ and the method adopted was ’tortious formula’. In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. [(1997) SCC 1 416] the expression used by this Court for determining the compensation was ’monetary compensation’. The formula adopted was ’cost to cost’ method. Courts have not, therefore, adopted a uniform criterion since no statutory formula has been laid down.”
tracted from: Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi v Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association (2011) 14 SCC 481- CLAT PG - 2026
- Constitutional Laws
- It is well recognized that actionable negligence in context of medical profession involves three constituents (i) duty to exercise due care; (ii) breach of duty and (iii) consequential damage. However, a simple lack of care, an error of judgment or an accident is not sufficient proof of negligence on part of the medical professional so long as the doctor follows the acceptable practice of the medical profession in discharge of his duties. He cannot be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative treatment or course of treatment was available or that more skilled doctors were there who could have administered better treatment.
A medical professional may be held liable for negligence only when he is not pos sessed with the requisite qualification or skill or when he fails to exercise reasonable skill which he possesses in giving the treatment. None of the above two essential conditions for establishing negligence stand satisfied in the case at hand as no ev idence was brought on record to prove that Dr. Neeraj Sud had not exercised due diligence, care or skill which he possessed in operating the patient and giving treatment to him. When reasonable care, expected of the medical professional, is extended or rendered to the patient unless contrary is proved, it would not be a case for actionable negligence.
tracted with edits and revisions from Neeraj Sud v Jaswinder Singh 2024 INSC 825- CLAT PG - 2026
- Law of Torts